The Big Luongo Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 Very excited about the strong overall game of Gaunce. Gaunce is exactly what the Canucks need in their lineup right now over a soft useless Vey as a matter of fact. Gaunce and Zalewski should be playing on the big club they both bring to the table what the Canucks are really lacking all around. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 11 minutes ago, Alflives said: I agree 100%. But the elite skill guys are a MUST. We don't have those guys. Do the Canucks make it to the Finals in 82, 94, and 2011 without Gradin, Bure, and Sedin(s)? We need elite skill too, and yes those elite guys must have heart and work ethic. The team that beat us for the cup in 2011 had 2 players with more than 60 points (62 each). By all means, they had some very talented players and arguably 'elite' 2 way guys (and a peaking Chara on D) but IMO, no 'elite', PPG+ scoring forwards. Particularly risky ones who appear to have massive attitude/entitlement issues. By all means I'd consider trading Shink, Gaunce etc for ACTUAL players but Drouin is not that guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 1 hour ago, Alflives said: We gave up a second for Vey and a second for Baer. Giving up Gaunce in a Drouin trade is absolutely the type of risk this organization needs to do. We need ELITE skill. Drouin offers that. Whether he's tough enough to take the pounding he will certainly have to take to be Elite is a risk worth taking. IMHAO, of course. I'll take Gaunce over Drouin every day and twice on Sundays. He may not be as skilled, but his intangibles are through the roof. You've made it clear that you look, primarily at on ice skill as an indicator of success.......I think Gaunce will have more of an impact than Drouin will, over time, regardless of the stats line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 39 minutes ago, Alflives said: I like both Gaunce and Shinkaruk, but in a trade (that's deemed fair) both sides need to suffer some pain. I agree. I would rather give up Shinkaruk and keep Gaunce. Gaunce (at minimum) will be a solid third/fourth line player. Shinkaruk (IMHAO) is either a top six guy or he's off to Europe. I think I'm starting to understand some of the character traits JB talks a lot about, but he never really defines. Sure he wants good people. But, he also wants guys - like the twins - who will take a beating to play their game. For the twins (and most elite players) it's taking that beating while keeping the puck, or getting to the hard to get to areas. Does Drouin have that in his character? I don't know. Is he worth the risk to find out? I believe his elite skill gives him: first line difference maker on a Cup level team ceiling. You can guess about Drouin's character but I suggest that hockey is a small enough world that Benning will have a good take on him if he does/does not deal. Since this is not a one for one deal it means the Canucks have to give up some kind of combo offer. I suggest this is more gamble than the org can afford. My question about Drouin is what history exists that we do not know about? When a player walks out it is saying a lot on both sides of the dispute. Might not be a fair comparison but it reminds me of all the deals suggested around Kane while he was in Winnipeg. That history was suggested even while in Atlanta, continued with the Jets and now again in Buffalo. I do not know what Drouin's problem is. Maybe it is the coach. After all it appears Stamkos has a problem as well. I suggest that behind closed doors most NHL GM's will have a far better idea. I find it hard to believe that Yzerman would not find a deal for Drouin before the TDL. They are headed to playoffs and need all the help they can get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 7 minutes ago, Boudrias said: You can guess about Drouin's character but I suggest that hockey is a small enough world that Benning will have a good take on him if he does/does not deal. Since this is not a one for one deal it means the Canucks have to give up some kind of combo offer. I suggest this is more gamble than the org can afford. My question about Drouin is what history exists that we do not know about? When a player walks out it is saying a lot on both sides of the dispute. Might not be a fair comparison but it reminds me of all the deals suggested around Kane while he was in Winnipeg. That history was suggested even while in Atlanta, continued with the Jets and now again in Buffalo. I do not know what Drouin's problem is. Maybe it is the coach. After all it appears Stamkos has a problem as well. I suggest that behind closed doors most NHL GM's will have a far better idea. I find it hard to believe that Yzerman would not find a deal for Drouin before the TDL. They are headed to playoffs and need all the help they can get. I agree, it's JB's job (as you say) to know about players' character. If he does trade for Drouin, then it's his job on the line. However, the possibility of not getting these elite skill guys (when they come available) may cost him his job too? I think JB didn't choose Ehlers or Nylander in the Virtanen draft, because he thought these two elite skilled players didn't have the character to take the beating they will ultimately take to help their teams win. His view may be the same about Druoin. Sooner, rather than later, he will need to acquire elite skill, or we will not win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 19 minutes ago, Alflives said: Sooner, rather than later, he will need to acquire elite skill, or we will not win. 55 minutes ago, J.R. said: The team that beat us for the cup in 2011 had 2 players with more than 60 points (62 each). By all means, they had some very talented players and arguably 'elite' 2 way guys (and a peaking Chara on D) but IMO, no 'elite', PPG+ scoring forwards. Particularly risky ones who appear to have massive attitude/entitlement issues. By all means I'd consider trading Shink, Gaunce etc for ACTUAL players but Drouin is not that guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 Just now, J.R. said: What's your point exactly? Guys can have elite skill and score 60 to 70 points. Toews does that every year. Kopitar too. The Twins are doing that right now. We are looking at a team with our top players scoring 40 to 50 points, when the Twins leave. That's trouble with a Giant T. I read (earlier in a thread) that the bigger the letter, the more believable the message. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Alflives said: We are looking at a team with our top players scoring 40 to 50 points, when the Twins leave. That's trouble with a Giant T. According to who's crystal ball? Horvat, McCann, Baer, Shinkaruk, Boesser, Virtanen etc all have the capacity to be 50+ point players in their primes. Never mind any other players we draft, trade for or sign over the next 2-4 years before the twins likely retire (while quite likely being 50+ point players for a good portion if not all of that time themselves). I'm not particularly concerned about our forwards. Edited February 22, 2016 by J.R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 1 hour ago, Alflives said: I agree 100%. But the elite skill guys are a MUST. We don't have those guys. Do the Canucks make it to the Finals in 82, 94, and 2011 without Gradin, Bure, and Sedin(s)? We need elite skill too, and yes those elite guys must have heart and work ethic. Then why are you all hot for Drouin? What about him being "small and soft", which you repeat like a Hare Krishna mantra as much as "elite"? Or is that only because he's "not a Euro"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 1 minute ago, J.R. said: According to who's crystal ball? Horvat, McCann, Baer, Shinkaruk, Boesser, Virtanen etc all have the capacity to be 50+ point players in their primes. Never mind any other players we draft, trade for or sign over the next 2-4 years before the twins likely retire (while quite likely being 50+ point players for a good portion if not all of that time. I'm not particularly concerned about our forwards. Sorry, no over sized letters. I can't agree with the little print. Little print = little idea. We need elite scorers. Why do you think we had such a good team since the Twins came along? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 3 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said: Then why are you all hot for Drouin? What about him being "small and soft", which you repeat like a Hare Krishna mantra as much as "elite"? Or is that only because he's "not a Euro"? Yes, I hate Euro's. I want only good Canadian and American character guys, like the three I mentioned in my previous post as the reasons for us getting the the finals: Gradin, Bure, and Sedin(s)? Good North American character guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 1 minute ago, Alflives said: Yes, I hate Euro's. I want only good Canadian and American character guys, like the three I mentioned in my previous post as the reasons for us getting the the finals: Gradin, Bure, and Sedin(s)? Good North American character guys. So you'd rather have a flaky North American player with attitude and entitlement issues over a gritty Euro with character? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred65 Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 On 2016-02-20 at 0:26 PM, Fred65 said: Likely I'm a cynic but keeping Shinkaruk and Gaunce out of sight in Utica makes me wonder what or if there's a place for them in a JB world. Draft day may mean some thing special to these two players ....just saying LOL Shinkaruk traded for Granlun from Calgary LOL what did I tell you Gaunce is next Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharbinder Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 7 minutes ago, Fred65 said: LOL Shinkaruk traded for Granlun from Calgary LOL what did I tell you Gaunce is next So lost, there is no way we couldn't have gotten something more for him... =S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred65 Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 I can't believe it frankly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flickyoursedin Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 6 hours ago, Boudrias said: IMO pigeon holing this kid as a 4th or 3rd liner is foolish. On what basis is this being concluded? If you tell me that you are a Utica season ticket holder then I might reconsider. In my mind it is laughable that Shinkaruk is penciled in as a top 6 forward and Gaunce who could overtake Shink's ppg totals is not. A lot of assumptions being made. It reminds me of comments about Horvat when he was drafted. I was saying that when drafted we thought we had a big kid who had limited offensive upside and most likely a bottom 6 guy for the future. I've been the one sticking up for Gaunce lately in this thread in saying that he's made tremendous progression this year and think it'd be wise to hold onto him and see what we have as he could be more valuable to our future than we thought. These prospects get their line assumptions from fans seeing junior stats. Gaunce never racked up points so everybody said he must be a bottom 6 player. However when you looked at Gaunce every year up to date he's gotten better and you just don't know when that progression stops. I say we wait and find out. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
86Viking Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 good bye gaunce. Last year we acquire Baer he takes Shink spot and shink gets dealt a year later to the day almost. Canucks acquire granlund who is almost what gaunce is, so now to next deadline dont be shocked to see gaunce moved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jiggs50 Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 31 minutes ago, Yotes said: good bye gaunce. Last year we acquire Baer he takes Shink spot and shink gets dealt a year later to the day almost. Canucks acquire granlund who is almost what gaunce is, so now to next deadline dont be shocked to see gaunce moved Disagree. Gaunce is 6'2 and can play wing and center. Brings a different skill set. Granlund is Vey's replacement imo 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flickyoursedin Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 2 minutes ago, Jiggs50 said: Disagree. Gaunce is 6'2 and can play wing and center. Brings a different skill set. Granlund is Vey's replacement imo Hopefully Vey is moved this TDL. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
86Viking Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 5 minutes ago, Jiggs50 said: Disagree. Gaunce is 6'2 and can play wing and center. Brings a different skill set. Granlund is Vey's replacement imo so add more 2way players, and lose pure offense which just so happens to be an area we need? Dont we have alot more 2way players than scorers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now